One of the things that Im convinced is going to become critically important over the next year or two is how to make a Free-to-Play game that isnt all about pain mitigation. Most F2P games eke out money by essentially creating gates - long timers that can be sped up by purchases, energy that once depleted takes time to recover, massive grinding that can be surpassed or sped up by real money, etc. A lot of this is how games are made now because some early successful F2P games exploited these kinds of mechanics. So if you look at what has historically been successful, theres no question that most of these mechanics work... for a while. There are two major problems with these structures: 1.) They suck for the player. I think there is a positive element to certain types of appointment gaming. Something like Clash of Clans can become a habit where a player plays for 5 minutes when they have a free moment, makes a certain amount of progress, and then is essentially forced to log off. There are ways to do this that are fun, and not punitive. But there are way MORE examples of these kinds of games that use massive grinding, timers, etc. simply as ways to squeeze the player for money. Much of the time, it makes the gameplay worse, because the goal of the developer is essentially to inflict enough pain that the player gives up and spends money instead of playing. 2.) As the last sentence reflects, this makes monetization of your game a contest between you and the player. The player is challenged to see how far they can get without spending anything, and the developer is challenged to try to crush the player in a way that gets them to spend, theoretically without getting them to quit. But that calculation is made with the assumption that a very small percentage of players will *ever* pay, and that as a result, crushing the vast majority of the player base is more or less consequence-free, since those people would never pay anyway (there are many other ways in which this is wrong, but lets just start there). How is this acceptable? First, a much better long-term proposition is to create a game that players actually *enjoy* that isnt constantly browbeating them for money. Second, monetization shouldnt be an antagonistic interaction between the player and the developer. The developer should be providing *value* to the player, and the player should *want* to spend money to support the developer, and acquire that valuable thing. Just as a simple example, Ive been playing a game called Pixel People. Its a fantastic little time-killer (its barely a game), but its lovingly crafted, charming, and beautiful. I *want* to give the developer money. But I like the experience as it is. I dont want to massively accelerate it, because I enjoy the pace at which it currently exists. They release new content every so often. To access the content, I simply have to do whatever is required - unlock enough land, get enough $ or Utopium (their premium currency). Now, most of these can be insta-completed by simply paying enough Utopium to unlock the genes to get new clones. But I dont *want* to do that. I want to work my way up to getting enough stuff that I can get it all naturally. In essence, what theyre trying to offer me is theoretically less pain, but since I enjoy the experience, what theyre *actually* offering me in exchange for money is *less game*. Thats a *terrible* value proposition, and actually prevents me from spending money I *want* to spend. If instead theyd simply said, Weve made an expansion available. Itll cost you $3. Id pay it every single time they release more content. Their updates are brilliant - often heavy in new content, funny, and *worth it* to me. But they dont lock anything behind a paywall, and the things theyre asking me to buy are things that I actively dont want. If youre going to build a game that has timers and gates, consider that we now know that its really only a fairly small percentage of your audience that wants to mitigate pain through purchases. That percentage perceives that to have value, and theyll spend for it. But dont ignore the *rest* of your audience. You have to try to understand the things they value. Some people want unlocks instantly. Some people want more content. Some people want exclusivity. There are SO many different potential value propositions - in my experience, we found that there are many that are *significantly* more effective than simple pain mitigation. We must, as an industry, work toward a F2P model that isnt about screwing the players, and its not about putting them in contention with the developers. It is vital that we understand that our sole goal with F2P is to provide a value to players that they understand and *want* to spend money on if we hope to create relationships with players that will last in the long-term.
Posted on: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 05:26:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015